Re: Humor as a communication technique

[Martha J Davidson <editrix -at- SLIP -dot- NET>]

At 11:22 AM 6/16/98 -0500, Laurel Nelson wrote:

[story about physics professor's example using a cat snipped]

>I found the above statement very offensive. To me, cruelty to animals is
>not funny even when it's imaginery. As some people have said, you have to
>be very careful when using humor. It's all a matter of perception.

At the risk of being labeled humorless, or perhaps worse, I agree
completely with Laurel.  In fact, the cat story from the original message
bothered me so much I don't want to propagate it with this message, even if
it obscures the discussion.

What is funny to one may not be to others, and there are at least as many
reasons for this as there are humans on the planet.  Unless I am completely
certain that a bit of humor will not cause pain for any potential reader of
a document or help topic, I prefer to err on the side of caution.

I agree with the poster who said that the most likely place for humor is
examples.  Analogies often communicate complex concepts more effectively
than pure expository prose, and this is where I might include something
less than completely serious, but even there I would hesitate.  Recently a
colleague and I designed an example for a Guided Tour module for our
product, based on a database of people who own pets and board them at
kennels.  The doc manager vetoed the idea, saying that our customers would
not appreciate such a frivolous example.  We chose a different example.

I guess I'd rather play it safe.

martha


--
Martha Jane {Kolman | Davidson}
Senior Technical Writer
mailto:editrix -at- slip -dot- net

"If I am not for myself, who will be for me?
 If I am only for myself, what am I?
 If not now, when?"
        --Hillel, "Mishna, Sayings of the Fathers 1:13"